1559 réponses à ce sujet

[Getterray]

For those that say that EULAs aren't legally binding.



End of line.

[Haexpane]

Mashiki wrote...
 
In most western countriest the EULA isn't enforcable, is not considered a contract, or even allowed to be used for punitive measures.  In Germany they're fully unenforcable, in Canada it's a bit of both.  

In america we let the corporations rule over us.  We even allow illegal monopolies as long as they own a lot of TV stations or control things like the NFL.  We've pretty much given up on workers rights and consumer rights in my beloved USA.  If you even talk about having rights as a worker you are branded an evil communist.

[moilami]

Crossknive wrote...

They didn't take away his game, you are all misunderstanding the situation. He can't activate his game on a banned account. Seems logical to me, why would you even want to activate a game on a banned account.

Go get your account banned and try to activate Origins. Same issue. IT'S A BANNED account obviously you can't activate it. it's a DRM thing that will happen with any online activation game, and any Bioware game with online activation.

If he can't play the game he owns because he can't activate it for 72 hours it is effectively the same as stealing the game he bought for 72 hours.

If that happened because he said something in the forums, huh, then I am speechless to say the least.

[cm0s]

Stanley Woo wrote...

This is a reminder that discussion of software piracy is not permitted in our forums.

By Swedish IP laws, you're allowed to modify legally bought computer software to make it run for its intended purpose. Is it still considered as piracy, even if it's lawful? Just want a clarification.

[Crossknive]

moilami wrote...

Crossknive wrote...

They didn't take away his game, you are all misunderstanding the situation. He can't activate his game on a banned account. Seems logical to me, why would you even want to activate a game on a banned account.

Go get your account banned and try to activate Origins. Same issue. IT'S A BANNED account obviously you can't activate it. it's a DRM thing that will happen with any online activation game, and any Bioware game with online activation.

If he can't play the game he owns because he can't activate it for 72 hours it is effectively the same as stealing the game he bought for 72 hours.

If that happened because he said something in the forums, huh, then I am speechless to say the least.

He could go make another account then and activate it on that one if he can't wait the 72 hours. 

[Dragoonlordz]

moilami wrote...

Mashiki wrote...

moilami wrote...

I just want to know what is this new crap about EA playing big brother and not letting people to play games they have bought. I have thought enough about it with the information I have in hand and made a decision that if EA really begins to think he can chose to not let people play games they have bought, then I will give my money to some other game company in the future who does not try rob me by stealing games I own.

In most western countriest the EULA isn't enforcable, is not considered a contract, or even allowed to be used for punitive measures.  In Germany they're fully unenforcable, in Canada it's a bit of both.  But you can't revoke a persons ownership of a product if they've bought it.  In the US it varies by state by state.  Regardless of that, someone's head is going to roll somewhere.  And this type of stuff ends up as one thing: Consumer backlash.

But considering DA2 is lackluster at the best, this will further galvinize people who were sitting on the fence on buying it and push them so they won't buy it.  Which is fine with me.  Rushed PoS shouldn't be bought by anyone, and companies or 'company heads' who push for this type of development should suffer the losses of attempting to capitalize on it.

Yeah, that is why I don't read EULAs.

But this EA account thing is different. Each time I play DA the game tries to connect to EA servers and if it fails, then it tells me something like "your account whatever information could not be verified, and because of that you will miss stuff in game".

I definetly want to know what happens to my stuff if my account gets banned for because of something what I said in the forums.

If your account is suspended, you do not have access to that DLC even though it will still be there when suspension ends. But if it wasn't for the activation/register system 'thing' a suspension of your account will only block you from online DLC not stop you playing offline.

In the case of this EA fiasco it seems that they suspended his EA online account and the DRM had a hissy fit if you will and therefore locked him out from registering this is the only actual issue. Unfortuantly they use DRM for a reason and thats a shame but every company does that deals with digital media. They will never no matter how much people complain about how unfair it is, stop using the method of account banning or suspensions just as XBL uses the exact same thing for accounts they ban or suspend.

The only difference between the two is in this case the suspension affected his registration which is a seporate issue of DRM. As for a full on ban if you haven't downloaded your DLC I imagine you would not lose it if you made another account you may be able to reclaim it, though this I am not certain of.

[moilami]

Anathemic wrote...

We really need a BioWare/EA official response to this issue, it's been a day already.

Definetly. This is news in many gaming sites. This was total breaking news for me. I was never aware my property could be stolen by a game company because of what I say in a forum. I wish I knew before I bought DA Ultimate Edition! Could had easily lived without it.

[Badgame]

 The EULA violates first ammendment rights, and therefore would not stand up in the court of law.   Just because we are online does not mean that US Law does not apply.

[Haexpane]

EA-Bioware already responded. They banned the guy for flaming the devs.

Case closed. user outrage is irrelevant until the sales numbers come in.

[Haexpane]

Badgame wrote...

 The EULA violates first ammendment rights, and therefore would not stand up in the court of law.   Just because we are online does not mean that US Law does not apply.

No, EA forums are not public places, they are privately owned and operated.  You do not have free speech on corporate property.  You  have no guaranteed right to buy and play videogames.

Furthermore giant corporations control american law, good luck burning your life savings only to see your case go into appeal anyway.

[Anathemic]

Haexpane wrote...

EA-Bioware already responded. They banned the guy for flaming the devs.

Case closed. user outrage is irrelevant until the sales numbers come in.

Cool apparently EA/BioWare is the only publisher/dev that can't take critics.

[Dragoonlordz]

moilami wrote...

Anathemic wrote...

We really need a BioWare/EA official response to this issue, it's been a day already.

Definetly. This is news in many gaming sites. This was total breaking news for me. I was never aware my property could be stolen by a game company because of what I say in a forum. I wish I knew before I bought DA Ultimate Edition! Could had easily lived without it.

You sure like to use the word stolen or steal which implies the physical removal of a product or possession, this is factually incorrect in this case as the correct term is blocked or suspended. His account was suspended this in turn stopped him registering the game on that account for 72 hours. His DLC is still there but he will end up having to wait to access the content IF he actually bought any in the first place of which he has not said he did only people other than him saying he did.

The DRM true may be bad and may cause alot of problems given it's linking to the account, but all companies reserve the right to block ban or suspend your "account" the fact the DRM also blocked his offline play due to not being able to register his game is not the same issue imho.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 11 mars 2011 - 09:56 .

[triggerslol]

I have lost all my faith for bioware/ea. Rushing games, taunt forum members, ban forum members. I will not buy any bioware product until they restore my faith in them.
CD projekt and Bethesda are now the big ones.

[joe_sinister]

Haexpane wrote...

EA-Bioware already responded. They banned the guy for flaming the devs.

Case closed. user outrage is irrelevant until the sales numbers come in.

Trust me, if there is enough bad PR backlash EA would cave and change the policy. Just look at how they caved in that whole Taliban controvery with MOH, as proof of how spineless EA is in the face of bad publicity. Damned shame Bioware had to be purchased by these pricks.

[Anathemic]

Haexpane wrote...

Badgame wrote...

 The EULA violates first ammendment rights, and therefore would not stand up in the court of law.   Just because we are online does not mean that US Law does not apply.

No, EA forums are not public places, they are privately owned and operated.  You do not have free speech on corporate property.  You  have no guaranteed right to buy and play videogames.

Furthermore giant corporations control american law, good luck burning your life savings only to see your case go into appeal anyway.

Wtf do you know anything about the US Government/Economy?

We have a mixed economy, basic government regulation is present in the economy. If giant coroporations ruled American law, I'm pretty sure the whole Microsoft/Monopoly hassle was just a joke amirite?

Modifié par Anathemic, 11 mars 2011 - 09:56 .

[Badgame]

Haexpane wrote...

Badgame wrote...

 The EULA violates first ammendment rights, and therefore would not stand up in the court of law.   Just because we are online does not mean that US Law does not apply.

No, EA forums are not public places, they are privately owned and operated.  You do not have free speech on corporate property.  You  have no guaranteed right to buy and play videogames.

Furthermore giant corporations control american law, good luck burning your life savings only to see your case go into appeal anyway.

This is incorrect.  The violation is not in accordance with the fact that I am posting on their internet forum.  It becomes a violation when they stop me from utilizing a purchased product that is located on my computer because of something I said.

It is akin to purchasing something from a store, and having it taken away from you because you said something critical of the product.

Either way, this creates more pirates.

[Badgame]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

moilami wrote...

Anathemic wrote...

We really need a BioWare/EA official response to this issue, it's been a day already.

Definetly. This is news in many gaming sites. This was total breaking news for me. I was never aware my property could be stolen by a game company because of what I say in a forum. I wish I knew before I bought DA Ultimate Edition! Could had easily lived without it.

You sure like to use the word stolen or steal which implies the physical removal of a product or possession, this is factually incorrect in this case as the correct term is blocked or suspended. His account was suspended this in turn stopped him registering the game on that account for 72 hours. His DLC is still there but he will end up having to wait to access the content IF he actually bought any in the first place of which he has not said he did only people other than him saying he did.

The DRM true may be bad and may cause alot of problems given it's linking to the account, but all companies reserve the right to block ban or suspend your "account" the fact the DRM also blocked his offline play due to not being able to register his game is not the same issue imho.

If what you say is true, then pirating is not illegal.  The road goes both ways.

[Haexpane]

joe_sinister wrote...

Haexpane wrote...

EA-Bioware already responded. They banned the guy for flaming the devs.

Case closed. user outrage is irrelevant until the sales numbers come in.

Trust me, if there is enough bad PR backlash EA would cave and change the policy. Just look at how they caved in that whole Taliban controvery with MOH, as proof of how spineless EA is in the face of bad publicity. Damned shame Bioware had to be purchased by these pricks.

They caved on the MOH taliban nonsense because of astroturf political action committees.

No such astroturf bogus org is taking up this cause.

I wonder how well DA2 would have pre-sold if there was a disclaimer up front that said

"If you get angry about something in this game and say something against our company, you will not be able to play the game any more"

I mean, how many times did we curse out Nintendo over cheap deaths in Zelda II?  I can picture Shiggy smashing my NES console w/ his foot and wagging his finger at me

[aries1001]

So the user couldn't access any other game made by Bioware? Not even KOTOR who has an activation server on Lucas Arts maybe? If he has Mass Effect 1 and Mass Effect 2 installed and already acitvated, he should be able to play them? I'm not sure if DA: Origins can be played offline, though.

Edit:

Danish IP laws is the same Swedish IP laws. You're allowed to make alterations so that you can the software to work as intended. I'm not sure if this applies to this case, however, as EA is a US company and as such works under US IP and Copyrights Laws.

edit 2:
In the grand scheme of things, not being able to play a game for 72 /now close to 48 hours, is a minor annoyance. Not trying to derail the thread, but maybe, just maybe, the earth quake in Japan is more devastating and annoying right now.
And I bet that many gamers in Japan cannot play DA2...

Modifié par aries1001, 11 mars 2011 - 10:06 .

[Haexpane]

Anathemic wrote...

Haexpane wrote...

Badgame wrote...

 The EULA violates first ammendment rights, and therefore would not stand up in the court of law.   Just because we are online does not mean that US Law does not apply.

No, EA forums are not public places, they are privately owned and operated.  You do not have free speech on corporate property.  You  have no guaranteed right to buy and play videogames.

Furthermore giant corporations control american law, good luck burning your life savings only to see your case go into appeal anyway.

Wtf do you know anything about the US Government/Economy?

We have a mixed economy, basic government regulation is present in the economy. If giant coroporations ruled American law, I'm pretty sure the whole Microsoft/Monopoly hassle was just a joke amirite?

We DO have a mixed system, but the regulated part of the system is being "streamlined' by the teapartiers.  Unfortunately most people do not recognize that we have a mixed economy and regulations are the only thing saving us from complete 3rd world status.

Microsoft got away clean on the monopoly deal.  Only in EURO countries did they get dinged.  It's still what 90% MS windows, and 10% Apple (who just want to replace MS as the monopoly)  It WAS a joke to MS here in the USA

[Haexpane]

Badgame wrote...

 
This is incorrect.  The violation is not in accordance with the fact that I am posting on their internet forum.  It becomes a violation when they stop me from utilizing a purchased product that is located on my computer because of something I said.

It is akin to purchasing something from a store, and having it taken away from you because you said something critical of the product.

Either way, this creates more pirates.

No, that is a legal ARGUMENT you are attempting to make outside of a courtroom.  No one has and likely no one will take this up in court.

You can ARGUE that point, but there is no legal precedent for it, and no law in place supporting it.  Free speech is not applicable to being banned from an online service.

And the horrible DRM that prevents the user from playing the game they purchased is already covered, EA's lawyers have the ToS + buckets of cash.

[Mashiki]

cm0s wrote...
By Swedish IP laws, you're allowed to modify legally bought computer software to make it run for its intended purpose. Is it still considered as piracy, even if it's lawful? Just want a clarification.

No. Not piracy.  I always like Sweden for common sense laws like that.  There's a similar law in Canada regarding the circumvention of 'protection devices' if the company refuses to support the product, or will no longer support it.

[Anathemic]

Haexpane wrote...

Anathemic wrote...

Haexpane wrote...

Badgame wrote...

 The EULA violates first ammendment rights, and therefore would not stand up in the court of law.   Just because we are online does not mean that US Law does not apply.

No, EA forums are not public places, they are privately owned and operated.  You do not have free speech on corporate property.  You  have no guaranteed right to buy and play videogames.

Furthermore giant corporations control american law, good luck burning your life savings only to see your case go into appeal anyway.

Wtf do you know anything about the US Government/Economy?

We have a mixed economy, basic government regulation is present in the economy. If giant coroporations ruled American law, I'm pretty sure the whole Microsoft/Monopoly hassle was just a joke amirite?

We DO have a mixed system, but the regulated part of the system is being "streamlined' by the teapartiers.  Unfortunately most people do not recognize that we have a mixed economy and regulations are the only thing saving us from complete 3rd world status.

Microsoft got away clean on the monopoly deal.  Only in EURO countries did they get dinged.  It's still what 90% MS windows, and 10% Apple (who just want to replace MS as the monopoly)  It WAS a joke to MS here in the USA

Microsoft a monopoly is not a monopoly anymore, US governmetn regulation is present and always will be in a mixed exonomy.

Just saying big corporations control US law is an outright lie

[Freddo]

This whole event made me pleased I haven't bought DA2 yet. And now I'm frankly not sure if I ever will considering this stunt EA pulled, plus all the negative user opinions about the game already floating around the net. Maybe it's worth a bargin bin purchase though. I guess time will tell.

I can't say this is very surprising, though. No company gotten better after EA bought them. Origins, Westwood, Bullfrog and so many developers have suffered from EAs greed, and now it happened to Bioware too. Sad, but unfortunately not unexpected. To try to make a large epic RPG in 18 months is insane, and considering all the experience they have from past game developments, they really should have known that.

Good thing there are other good RPG developers out there, like the upcoming The Witcher 2 and hopefully Skyrim and Risen 2: Dark Waters too.

[moilami]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

moilami wrote...

Mashiki wrote...

moilami wrote...

I just want to know what is this new crap about EA playing big brother and not letting people to play games they have bought. I have thought enough about it with the information I have in hand and made a decision that if EA really begins to think he can chose to not let people play games they have bought, then I will give my money to some other game company in the future who does not try rob me by stealing games I own.

In most western countriest the EULA isn't enforcable, is not considered a contract, or even allowed to be used for punitive measures.  In Germany they're fully unenforcable, in Canada it's a bit of both.  But you can't revoke a persons ownership of a product if they've bought it.  In the US it varies by state by state.  Regardless of that, someone's head is going to roll somewhere.  And this type of stuff ends up as one thing: Consumer backlash.

But considering DA2 is lackluster at the best, this will further galvinize people who were sitting on the fence on buying it and push them so they won't buy it.  Which is fine with me.  Rushed PoS shouldn't be bought by anyone, and companies or 'company heads' who push for this type of development should suffer the losses of attempting to capitalize on it.

Yeah, that is why I don't read EULAs.

But this EA account thing is different. Each time I play DA the game tries to connect to EA servers and if it fails, then it tells me something like "your account whatever information could not be verified, and because of that you will miss stuff in game".

I definetly want to know what happens to my stuff if my account gets banned for because of something what I said in the forums.

If your account is suspended, you do not have access to that DLC even though it will still be there when suspension ends. But if it wasn't for the activation/register system 'thing' a suspension of your account will only block you from online DLC not stop you playing offline.

In the case of this EA fiasco it seems that they suspended his EA online account and the DRM had a hissy fit if you will and therefore locked him out from registering this is the only actual issue. Unfortuantly they use DRM for a reason and thats a shame but every company does that deals with digital media. They will never no matter how much people complain about how unfair it is, stop using the method of account banning or suspensions just as XBL uses the exact same thing for accounts they ban or suspend.

The only difference between the two is in this case the suspension affected his registration which is a seporate issue of DRM. As for a full on ban if you haven't downloaded your DLC I imagine you would not lose it if you made another account you may be able to reclaim it, though this I am not certain of.

I at first understood it is some kind of techical issue in the forum software, bad design. Then I read the EA terms of service and saw that I can maybe lose Witch Hunt and who knows what if my account gets banned.

I really don't know what EA can steal from me if I say something someone does not like in forums. That's why I want EA tells me. And most importantly I want clear answer can EA steal games I have bought because I said something in the forum.

I wont accept any company using power over me a second regarding when I chose to play (offline) games I have legally bought.